July 12, 2007 / by emptywheel

 

Fitzgerald: Not a Runaway Prosecutor, Explained Simply

I wanted to elaborate on the Armitage post I did earlier, showing that (contrary to the wails of the Libby Lobby), Fitzgerald did not pursue Libby while ignoring the Novak leak. In addition to the inconsistencies in Armitage’s Novak story, in fall 2004, there remained inconsistencies in the Rove Novak story and–I would submit–the Libby Novak story.

As I explained earlier, in August 2004, Fitzgerald had identified the following inconsistencies in Armitage’s Novak story:

Novak and Armitage agree on several importantfacts, such as the time, date and place of the meeting during which theconversation took place, and the fact that Wilson’s wife and employment by theCIA was disclosed to Novak by Armitage in response to a question by novak as towhy the CIA had sent Wilson on the trip. Their testimony diverges as to whetherArmitage provided the first name of Ms. Plame, though both agree the last name,“Plame” was not provided. Novak recalls being told by Armitage that Wilson’swife worked in the area of weapons of mass destruction –[redacted] Armitagedoes not recall discussing the area in which Wilson’s wife worked. Novak andArmitage give differing accounts of other materials not germane to the instantmotion. The investigation of Armitage’s conduct is ongoing. [my emphasis]

There’s one more that was not yet identified, too:

Armitage testified that he did not recalldiscussing Wilson’s wife’s employment with any reporter other than Novak priorto July 14,2003, and specifically denied any recollection of discussing thematter with Cooper or any of his Time colleagues.

Copyright © 2018 emptywheel. All rights reserved.
Originally Posted @ https://www.emptywheel.net/2007/07/12/fitzgerald-not-a-runaway-prosecutor-explained-simply/